Cleric choice

[krunchyfrogg]

I'm sorry dude, but you're just digging the grave deeper and deeper.

Well, its hilarious if you feel insulted by such a little cause. whatever.

You mean like calling me a fool?

if you want to choose low ability points for class abilites, then do it.

My example was of a pen and paper character where the DM gave us our stats, and we had to choose where to put them. What my example showed was actual roleplaying, not putting certain roles of characters into a straightjacket (every cleric will turn undead when they can).

you choose whatever you wanna play. but dont feel insulted if i call someone a fool who does not consider the main important abilities for his character. thats just an easy fact.

You still miss the point. The "main important abilities" for my cleric are spellcasting and tanking. Maybe yours is different, but nobody is telling you you're wrong for playing that way.

The rest of your rant just shows you being even more defensive. Please stop telling people how we should all place our ability points and how we should play our characters. Please!

Oh and to quote you from much earlier in the thread:

The real power within cleric's domains lie in their granted powers they receive.

You mean like the free Weapon Focus in axes the Battleguards of Tempus get?

[ 11-06-2005, 07:44 PM: Message edited by: krunchyfrogg ]

[krunchyfrogg]

Originally posted by Karrde: @krunchyfrogg: the difference is that you configure your cleric for the specific demands IWD2 needs. I configure my cleric as it would be a pen & paper cleric and THEN you would be a fool if you choose low charisma. not only rebuking is CHA-based for clerics, skills are CHA-based aswell. But i understand the temptation to specialize your chars for the specific thing you need in IWD2.

WTF are you talking about? I've never even made it past the prologue in IWD2. And I am basing my Cleric off of one I played for a long time in REAL D&D, where you make friends, roll dice, and get out of your home.

And good for you man! I'm glad YOU configure your cleric like YOU would in a real game, but that isn't how EVERYBODY ELSE does it, necessarily. You need to learn that different people play the game differently than you do, and that's okay, EVEN IF you don't think it's the "best way" to go about it.

EDIT:

I'm sure glad I got that quote in before you deleted your own post.

[ 11-06-2005, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: krunchyfrogg ]

[Karrde]

Oh well, you are pretty angry now, uh?

dont you think you overreact a little bit?

first, i did correct typos as i edited my post and not the content.
second: in some way, you come to the conclusion that i dictate how you configure your character. well, if you _really_ re-read my posting, you ll see the opposite.
just to repeat: if you want a low-main-ability paladin/bard/wizard/cleric etc, then do it. do it. i dont care if you do it. its your choice.
but: not taking certain important thing into account a class depends on is kinda.... foolish? naive? strange? choose whatever term you want, its no insult at all, its a matter of fact.

it does not threaten your free style of roleplaying if you stay within certain abilities, really. if you want to tweak your cleric as u like him, then do it. but then again, why not give him wisdom of 10? if i follow four arguments, i could say that MY cleric doesn't want all that divine stuff at all because he likes to swing his mace much more.
it would be really okay to play such a hero (following your arguments) but we all know that it would be plain stupid not following certain D&D rules.
Oh, and all about the granted powers:
sure, a tempus cleric may have the weapon focus. why? because he chooses (besides his divine powers) to be a fighting hero. I d call such a hero a battle-cleric and yet, he is still a cleric.

thats the wonderful thing with RPG: you can create whatever you want and intensify your personal gaming style.
even if you choose not to rely on some special/main powers of a certain class, its your choice.
if you want to have crappy stats in important base attributes, do it.
but then again, give others the right to express themselves (free opinion?) by saying that its kinda follish.

period.
?

[krunchyfrogg]

Originally posted by Karrde: first, i did correct typos as i edited my post and not the content. second: in some way, you come to the conclusion that i dictate how you configure your character. well, if you _really_ re-read my posting, you ll see the opposite.

So now you're a liar. Read the post right before this one by me, and show me where you corrected those typos. You outright deleted your post. Who do you think you're kidding?

[Luvian]

You guys got carried away, I'm now locking this thread. In the future, if you want to debate the finer points of roleplaying, do it in a mature way.

That said, in my opinion, you can roleplay your character as you want. You can have an ugly and dim witted guy that always wanted to be a bard. He'd suck at it, but it seem to me as far as roleplaying experiences can get, this would be pure gold. I'd get lots of fun out of it.

Roleplaying is not about numbers, but pretending to be a character, and have him interact with his made up world. This to me obviously mean characters that are special will give a way better roleplaying experience. Just playing your average joe warrior doesn't sound as exciting. (Not that there's anything wrong with it. Your campaign would be pretty... interesting... if all the pcs were "special").

And as for Lathander, it's true that he usually has followers of a certain style. But what's to say an old grizzled veteran didn't end up retiring in a peacefull farm community after losing his left arm in a skirmish some years ago in the area. Much to the dismay of the local priestly community, this guy might have been touched with their religion and decided to join. I'm pretty sure this veteran would feel way more comfortable hitting on things than waving a pretty trinket around.

And the smart but weak paladin. Who's to say an holly warrior always has to be defeating evil with his muscles. Generals are way more precious than front line soldiers, and a good general need to be smart. There's many way to defeat evil. With elaborate plans, you might not even need to raise a sword. And again, this would be much more fun and challenging than your average "perfect" paladin.

In my opinion, the real fun, the real point of roleplaying, is playing flawed characters. Just as in real life.

If you guys want to debate more on roleplaying or just which priest is the best, you can open another thread. But I'll be monitoring it, and if it get out of control, there will be sanctions.

[ 11-07-2005, 09:07 PM: Message edited by: Luvian ]